DESIGNING A PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAM

By the time you select techniques you should know The target stakeholders What has to be accomplished with them at each step What you’ll be doing with the information you learn from them

DEVELOPING PUBLIC INVOVLEMENT (PI) PLANS Three stages: PI Plan Appraisal PI Plan Design PI Plan Implementation

PI PLAN APPRAISAL Identify the appraisal team Clarify the decision being made Identify decision constraints and schedule drivers Identify issues and stakeholders Identify “decision-maker” Determine what level of participation is needed to resolve the issues Assess potential level of controversy

WHO NEEDS TO BE INVOLVED IN THE PI PLAN APPRAISAL People/organizational units impacted by the decision or by open discussion of the topic. People/organizational units called on to assist with the public participation effort. People with special expertise needed, e.g. writers, graphics. People whose participation is needed for credibility.

CLARIFYING THE DECISION BEING MADE for examples What method is appropriate for isolating people from flooding? What kind of structure should be built? Where should the structure be located?

DECISION CONSTRAINTS AND SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES Management pre-commitment to an outcome Schedule or resource constraints Constraints on release of information Opposition to public participation from within the Corps

SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCESYESNOIMPACT ON PROGRAM Cultural/ethnic sensitivities (e.g. most impacted people are from a single cultural/ethnic minority). National interest (e.g. most interested stakeholders are in Washington D.C., not near the site) Distance (interested stakeholders are scattered over a large area geographically) Issue connected politically to other issues - difficult to keep this issue distinct Level of interest - outrage versus apathy Political sensitivities - key political figures have positions or reputations to defend related to this issues

IDENTIFY ISSUES AND STAKEHOLDERS Issues Internal Stakeholders External Stakeholders

WHO IS A “STAKEHOLDER?” Stakeholders are: –People or groups who see themselves as having rights and interests at stake – those affected –Indirectly and directly affected groups –Those who can affect –Clients are stakeholders, but not all stakeholders are clients

IDENTIFYING THE STAKEHOLDERS –Who might be affected? –Who is responsible for what is intended? –Who are representatives of the likely affected? –Who will be actively against? –Who can contribute resources? –Who are the voiceless? –Whose behavior will have to change?

WHO ARE THE STAKEHOLDERS?

STAKEHOLDERS - BY TYPE OF IMPACT Economics Use Mandate Values/ political philosophy Proximity

STAKEHOLDERS - BY SECTOR Public Interest groups (NGOs) IndividualsPrivate

STAKEHOLDERS - BY LOCATION Local National Neighbor countries International Regional

ISSUE: RESPONSIBILITY Studies that must be completed before this issue can be resolved: Policy decisions that must be made before this issue can be resolved Informational materials that need to be developed to address this issue Other actions needed DEVELOPING AN ISSUE MANAGEMENT PLAN

ASSESSING LEVEL OF CONTROVERSY ISSUE Prior Contro­ versy on same Issue Tie-in to Another Major Issue/ Power Struggle Significance to Major Stakeholders Probable Level of Controversy YesNoYesNoLowMed. High LowMed.HI gh

WHY IDENTIFY THE DECISION- MAKER? Worst-case scenario: Work with public, achieve a consensus, but it is over-ruled by someone in Wash DC Ask the decision-makers who the critical constituencies are Get decision-maker to buy into the process design

WHAT LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION IS NECESSARY FOR IMPLEMENTATION? DECISION BEFORE THE DECISION THE DECISION/ “INFORMED CONSENT” THE DECISION Public Information Procedural Public Participation Consensus- Seeking Public Participation Alternative Dispute Resolution BE INFORMED OF THE BE HEARDINFLUENCEAGREE TO Negotiation/ Alternative Dispute Resolution

THE SATISFACTION TRIANGLE People derive satisfaction from different aspects of participation: SATISFACTION TRIANGLE Procedural Satisfaction Psychological Satisfaction Substantive Satisfaction

HOW MUCH POWER OVER THE PROCESS ARE YOU WILLING TO SHARE? How much control over the process you share depends on the “orbit” With co-decision makers: Your chances of achieving a mutually acceptable outcome are low unless you are willing to share control over the process

HOW MUCH POWER OVER THE PROCESS ARE YOU WILLING TO SHARE? With public groups:  Do they bring something to the table [having to share power with someone you see as having less at stake breeds resentment?  Do they commit up-front to finding a solution (or wait until you make a decision then tell you whether you guessed right or not)?  Will they commit the time, resources or energy to be a full partner?

ORBITS OF PARTICIPATION

DIFFERENT ORBITS MAY REQUIRE DIFFERENTS LEVELS ORBIT OF PARTICIPATIONLEVEL OF PARTICIPATION Co-decision makersAgree with the decision Active participantsSubstantial influence over outcome Technical reviewersSubstantial influence over technical methodology CommentersBe heard before decision ObserversProvided complete information Unsurprised apathetics Given sufficient information to decide whether to explore further

TEAM ASSIGNMENT Complete instructions on page Conduct a PI Plan Appraisal for the case assigned to your team Agree on 2-3 major things you learned from doing the appraisal Instructor will facilitate a short IPR on your teams progress

PI PLAN DESIGN Identify the PI Plan design team Identify the steps in the decision making process, and the schedule for completion Identify involvement objectives for each step Analyze the exchange of information that must take place to achieve the objectives Identify appropriate involvement techniques to meet these objectives Develop a plan integrating the techniques

WHO NEEDS TO BE INVOLVED IN THE PI PLAN DESIGN People/organizational units impacted by the decision or by open discussion of the topic. People/organizational units called on to assist with the public participation effort. People with special expertise needed, e.g. writers, graphics. People whose participation is needed for credibility.

SCHEDULE BASED ON STEPS OF THE PLANNING PROCESS STEPS OF THE PLANNING PROCESS COMPLETION DATES Specify problems and opportunities Inventory and forecast conditions Formulate alternative plans Evaluate effects of alternative plan Compare alternative plan Select recommended plan10/30/03 Work back from end date

IDENTIFY PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT OBJECTIVES STEP OF THE PLANNING PROCESS PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT OBJECTIVES Specify problems and opportunities Inventory and forecast conditions Formulate alternative plans Evaluate effects of alternative plan Compare alternative plan Select recommended plan

Identifying Problems and Opportunities Obtain a complete identification and understanding of how the problem(s) is viewed by all significant interests Step in the Process Possible Participation Objectives Agree on evaluation criteria and measures Inventorying and Forecasting Conditions Identify key assumptions of stakeholders about future conditions Get agreement on a set of scenarios that portray the range of probable future conditions Formulating Alternatives Get agreement that the set of alternatives that has been formulated captures the values orientations of the major stakeholders Evaluating Alternative Plans Develop a complete understanding of the impacts of the various alternatives, as viewed by the public Assess the relative merit assigned to alternatives by various interests Comparing Alternative Plans Determine which alternative would be the most acceptable Selecting a PlanEnsuring the stakeholders are informed on the basis for the decision

INFORMATION EXCHANGE The technical feasibility of each alternative What various sectors of the public like and dislike about each alternative Study results regarding the environmental, economic and social impact of each alternative Relative ranking of alternatives by various groups Perceptions about the environmental, economic and social impact of each alternative To stakeholdersFrom stakeholders Public participation objective: Assess the relative merit assigned to alternatives by various interests.

TEAM EXERCISE Complete instructions are on page Complete the PI Plan Design for the case assigned to your team – stopping just before you get to selection of techniques Identify 2-3 major things you learned during the PI Plan Design Instructor will facilitate a short IPR on your team’s progress